Opinion Talk

By candide

January 23, 2006 05:54 AM | Link to this

There are probably no more than one hundred people in the State of Georgia not brainwashed by evangelical Christianity who could teach the Bible in a scientific manner. (Yes, I am one of them). I think knowing the Bible — how and why it was written, why it was not dictated by God, how it is neither history nor biography but ideology — is very important. But I do not think it would be taught in a proper manner in the public schools. In fact, rather than have the students indoctrinated into evangelical nonsense I would prefer having the Bible burned!

By Michael

January 23, 2006 07:16 AM | Link to this

Given where Georgia schools are in the nation. Shouldn’t we worry about teaching them to read/write and do basic math. Once we can do that to some reasonable level then we can worry about an elective course that’s going to cost more money in litigation that we need to spend on basic education.

By Brian Curtis

January 23, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Of course! In literature classes.

By E. Lewis

January 23, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

The only fair way to teach the Bible in public schools would be as part of a comparative class involving many other religious texts and their impact on history and society. Students would be able to read and understand the impact of the Torah, the Koran, the Bhagavad-Gita, the Tibetan Book of the Dead, the Japji hymn, the Tao te Ching and more. This would be extremely difficult to do with the education budget shortfalls. Many “non essential� classes like art, band, physical education and even some advanced placement courses are being cut back or cancelled altogether. The schools would have to come up with funding, qualified personnel to teach and somewhere in an already cramped student schedule in which to have such a class.

Of course, not even Barney Fife is naive enough to believe that this push to teach the Bible as historical text anything more than an attempt appease the religious right by bringing the Protestant version of the King James Bible into public schools as the end all and be all.

By Mara

January 23, 2006 10:11 AM | Link to this

No. Can any Christian teach the class without conveying their faith that the Bible is factually accurate and, indeed, the “Word of the one, true, God”? Can any atheist teach it without conveying their dis-belief of the books’ supernatural inspiration? Even agnostics, those dastardly fence-sitters, tend to lean one way or the other. Whoever taught the class would have to have specialized training. The class itself would have to be monitored to ensure that christianity itself isn’t being “marketed”.
If you want your children to learn about Christ, Christianity, or the Bible…why don’t you just send them to Church? Isn’t that where you are supposed to go to learn about religion?

By Van

January 23, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

Brian Curtis, Suprisingly, I agree. As literature, it is undoubtly a best seller.

E. Lewis, “the Protestant version of the King James Bible” is redundant. Is there a non-protestant version of the King James?

In another light, as an elective, having different holy books studied in different classes, as literature, might be interesting.

By jim dumond

January 23, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

NOPE CANT HAPPEN.

By Bradley G

January 23, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

I do not want my children to learn about the Bible from “the learned scholar” Candide or any other teacher that doesn’t believe the words within. Mara is right, the place to learn more about the Bible is in the church, not the classroom.

By Court

January 24, 2006 08:36 AM | Link to this

I’d reject the teaching of the Bible in public schools because it’d open the flood gates to teaching the other various religious texts, such as the Koran. I have no problem with any religious text being taught in an impartial and historical/sociological context in colleges, but public schools with the elementary grades and high school would not be able to govern the various teachers from espousing their own biased beliefs. Invariably teachers would use the government ‘blessing’ to proselytize and garner new converts to their respective beliefs. Public schools are largely incompetently run government indoctrination centers as it is, and the introduction of religous texts — particularly the Koran, would be as thowing gasoline upon this multicultrural kettle we call the melting pot.

By candide

January 24, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Too bad, Bradley G, that your kids will never learn the truth about those crazy primitives who wrote the Bible and have managed to have their delusions believed by otherwise normal Americans.

By Nolan. C

January 24, 2006 07:55 PM | Link to this

students dont need to learn about the bible in school, if they want to learn about the bible they need to go to church, besides they already have enough to learn they DO NOT need to learn about the bible in school!

By Bradley G

January 25, 2006 08:42 AM | Link to this

Candide, I bet you don’t want to have Intellectual Design taught as an alternative to evolution either.

By M.C.

January 25, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this

Let’s see…What happened when we removed prayer in school years ago? Shootings, drug deals, and violence in the classroom increased 500%!

The same thing goes for abortion as well. When we gave women the right to choose to murder a child, violence against women and child abuse/molestation have increased ten fold.

Is this so hard to comprehend? So yes, we should definitely teach the Bible in our schools.

By Susie

January 25, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this

Mara, to answer your question, YES, an atheist CAN teach the Bible without conveying that it’s all a big fake. Many of the professors or teachers at Baptist Seminary ARE atheists!

By candide

January 25, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

Nature does not show intelligent design. As a medieval Spanish king remarked: had I been present at the creation I would have done a better job.

By Lyrazel

January 26, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this

Groan. GA is behind most all states in education and this is why. While I feel good proposals such as teaching bible as literature, or intelligent design, in public school is being heralded by the few — career-building academics such as math, science, language arts and other courses are lowering standards for these same students to the point where many GA students who get into colleges must take extensive remedial courses to catchup with the student body. We are importing teachers from abroad to help teach science and technology. Jobs are leaving the state and area and foreign competition sites: ignorance of hirees as one of the reasons the South loses out.

As far as being significant: it’s an elective course, and probably will be done in comic book form with a cheerful white Jesus and white god and white disciples depicted — it still won’t help Sally, Ruben or Jamal get a job after high school! Ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance is unemployment leaving students shackled with a high school degree that means nothing beyond student was capable of attendance and taking tests.

By Nel

January 26, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

Since many of those wanting to return biblical instruction to the schools talk about parental responsibility, why not be a responsible parent and teach your children the Bible? Unless you agree to teach all other religious texts (many of which piggy-back biblical accounts), then NO THANKS, I’ll teach my children because that’s MY responsibility as a parent. With the “my belief or no belief” attitude in the country these days, we are going to have major problems. My youngest child asked last week “who created God” and there is not answer that I know of for that one. It’s all a question of faith, which you can’t teach in a classroom. By the way, which subject do you suggest they take out of the classroom? Maybe you would agree to add an additional 45 minutes to the school day. I can just hear the howls.

By Court

January 26, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

I understand some communities have rejected teaching the Bible in their schools when local Muslims insisted the Koran had to be taught too. This was wise of them. Many Muslims try and pretend they are for law and order and are rather conservative — (perhaps draconian, fits better) and thus should share in the efforts of the religious right to establish a renewed presence in public schools. It’d be no different than ‘law and order’ Facists indoctrinating our children. And Islam is an enemy ideology against the USA and has a stated goal that would, in fact make war upon our Constitution. For those who think that the Muslims morality may be better than ‘no’ morality, they should take another look at virtually any other country in the world where Islam dominates. To make Georgia public schools open to religious teaching would hasten ‘Balkanization’ and open violence between Christians and Muslims. Besides those who pine for the ‘good ole days’ should understand, conservatives along with liberials, have long since sold out the values of America for the dollar — let’s get back morality in our government with voters educated in realities.

By Bradley G

January 26, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this

Nel, you are exactly right. Lately, the phrase “responsible parent” has been an oxymoron when it comes to the growing and nurturing of a child. Let me (and my church family) teach my child about subjects such as the Bible and abstinence. If not, someone in this world that would rather listen to a Spanish King than God would try to brainwash my child in those matters.

By candide

January 26, 2006 07:34 PM | Link to this

I doubt parents are capable of teaching the Bible to their children; all they will teach is the same nonsense they believe.

The State (see Plato) should take charge of the young and teach them the truth.

By candide

January 27, 2006 09:04 AM | Link to this

There is a case in Viterbo, Italy, in which the Church and a priest are being sued for deception in teaching falsehood about a certain Jesus of Nazareth. I wish we could sue the churches here on the same issue: they are preaching what never happened.

By E. Lewis

January 27, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this

Teach the Bible as literature.

Where are they going to get the money to fund this? School districts are talking about charging teachers who want to plug in a coffee machine, scaling back free/discount lunch programs and music/art/physical education classes are being cut. I don’t see how they can add electives to the curriculum when they are cutting back the ones that are already in place.

By Brittany

January 27, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this

I am a Christian and I read my Bible regularly, but because times have changed so much putting the Bible in the schools and expecting a teacher who may oppose it to teach your children sound docrine is unrealistic. Parents—the Bible should be taught in the home. Our pagan society has gone to far forward without it. The Bilbe would probably be torn down and ridiculed and nonetheless improperly taught in the schools! SO FYI that is why I have always been homeschooled.. I get taught the Bible because my parents make it their priority!

By J & J Ranch

January 27, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this

To teach the Bible in public schools in a fair way? Whose idea of “fair way� are we going to accept?

When I was a child, we had the morning prayer as well as say The Pledge of Allegiance. It was what we did. It hurt no one. I am surprised that it lasted as long as it did.

Growing up, I never could understand how one religion could claim it was right, meaning all other religions were wrong. And I am talking about Methodist v Baptist v Catholic v Protestant v…. How can so many Christians believing basically in the same thing, call the other religion wrong? With that said, does anyone really think that there is a fair way to teach the Bible in public schools?

There should be a silent moment of prayer every morning. That would give any and all religions the prayer without prejudice to one another.

The Sunday School teacher at Trinity United Methodist Church when I was that small child was brilliant. She never condemned different religions, she never said that Darwin was wrong.
I don’t remember her name, but what she did tell us was this: “Most religions believe in the same thing, therefore they are all correct� and; “As you grow up, you will be taught about evolution, and one day you will decide for yourself, but at least you would have been taught about both in order to make that decision.� She went on to say: “I believe there is a place for both, who is to say that God did not arrange evolution?�

Best darned advice I have ever been given on the matter. After growing up I see that if there had been more people teaching Sunday School like this brilliant lady, maybe there would be a lot less of this controversy and argument. And for those who want to learn even more, there are college courses.

Living with a man that went to college, one of the courses being Philosophy, I came to understand that there are religions that are much earlier than Christianity. So, who exactly can teach religion in the public school that has the knowledge and finesse to not discriminate against the other religions, the ability to say that Darwin and God can go exist in the same teachings and include all religions including atheism?

By Laurie LIberty

January 28, 2006 12:39 AM | Link to this

“only in America” Land of the Free and yes God Bless America and our schools.Prayers are being answered everyday and on every place on Earth. I say people will always have a problem accepting truth. I say we already have schools that teach the Bible and yes parents pay for them. So others should have to pay. Stop crying victim in the land of milk and honey and take accountability for themselves and the off spring that they made. Hey “they could start the I don,t like what America stands for” schools. I LOVE MY COUNTRY AND PROUD OF IT.

By SET

January 31, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

Maybe as part of a comparative religion class. But such a class is college or college bound material and not for the masses.

The masses should be taught reading, writing and math in state schools and not religion. They can read the bible with their families in church or wherever after they have mastered Dick and Jane, through 12th-grade reading level material.

Most urban public school 10th-graders can’t read Newsweek aloud - and I think that is set at 8th-grade level.

No one should get past 10th-grade if they can’t read USNews and World Report aloud.

Bible is out. Once you let religious tracts in the schools you will have the Koran being taught next. I want none of it in my state schools.

By Carlton Wyatt

February 1, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

Sure, teach the Bible in schools, but make the law also state that REAL science, like “evolution” must be taught in Sunday Schools in every Christian church, too. That’s only fair.

By B Olson

February 1, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

This whole discussion is meandering because of failure to define ‘teach the bible’.

In most churches, ‘bible study’ only refers to reading of passages and interpreting them based on the biases of that church… either by assuming it is literal truth or by trying to draw ‘big lessons’ from it.

Neither of these is worth introducing into a school environment… they belong in church or at home as writers here suggest.

What would be worth including in school would be actual bible ‘study’ involving a study of the historical, economic and social context surrounding the origins of the bible, selection of texts and then interpreting it within that context, as well as understanding and considering translation/mistranslation issues.

Only a very few churches teach the bible this way… it’s more often found in seminary or in a college course. Such a class can be taught by anyone with proper training, believer or not, and need not be a ‘comparative’ religion course.

But I’m fairly certain that this is NOT what was meant by the people proposing it be taught in school.